Rajendra Pachauri: a recycled tiny fish for Japan?

It struck me that rather conspicuous by their absence [at a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)] was any mention (nor any video greetings, as far as I could tell) of UNEP head honcho, Achim Steiner (deliverer of word-salads par excellence, here there and everywhere) or his “boss”, UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon […]

[…] Absent from the gallery of smiling pics of the IPCC’s newly elected honchos is any photo of Working Group III’s Co-Chair, “P.R. Shukla (India)”

During the course of attempting to find some enlightenment on the background of the newly elected, but apparently absent luminary, Prof. Shukla, I regret to report that the pickings were very slim, indeed. But I did encounter a three-minute video, “P.R. SHUKLA – Global Emissions. The 2050 Scenario” from 2010:

This (not particularly frequently viewed) video’s notes are as follows:

We need need a different perception of the problem, but the 2 degree target could be reached. We are a developing country; we are on the transition to a more modern and to an economy where emissions would be significantly lower. Prof. P.R. Shukla (Indian Institute of Management) at the International Workshop Reconciling Domestic Energy Needs and Global Climate Policy: Challenges and Opportunities for China and India in Venice.

As for Shukla’s apparent home-base, the Indian Institute of Management … well, this did not strike me as approaching a top notch source for expertise in “climate change” – or “sustainable development”, for that matter! Although it may well be a “leading business school“.

Oh, well … so much for Shukla. Unless, of course, the IPCC is prepared to offer more detailed backgrounds on its new, improved crop of high profile volunteer personnel. Considering the IPCC’s past performances on this particular “transparency” front, I certainly won’t hold my breath on that one!

Mind you, I must say that it was quite a surprise to note the following while perusing Nature magazine’s latest contribution to the “climate communication deficit” songbook:

The IPCC has had its controversies, including a glitch in its 2007 projection for Himalayan glacier melt and this year’s resignation of former chairman Rajendra Pachauri, who faces — and denies — accusations of sexual harassment.

How unfortunate that no one seems to have communicated Pachauri’s perambulations to the powers that be at yet another of the ever-increasing – and/or surfacing – pantheon of alphabet soups in the foggy worlds of “climate science” and “sustainable development”.

You see, one of the alphabet soups I had stumbled across a few days ago, during the course of shaking Shukla trees – in this instance, IGES – was a Japan-based group known as the “Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)” which was:

[E]stablished in March 1998 under an initiative of the Japanese government and with the support of Kanagawa Prefecture based on the “Charter for the Establishment of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies”. The aim of the Institute is to achieve a new paradigm for civilization and conduct innovative policy development and strategic research for environmental measures, reflecting the results of research into political decisions for realising sustainable development both in the Asia-Pacific region and globally. IGES made the transition to a Public Interest Incorporated Foundation in April 2012.

[…]

the Institute will tackle fundamental challenges to human society, which exists thanks to the bounty of the global environment, and to redefine the values and value systems of our present societies that have resulted in the global environmental crisis, in order to create new ways of conducting activities and a new paradigm for civilization. Based on the principles of this new paradigm, new social and economic systems will be built, so that a new era of the global environment can begin.

Any familiar bells and dog-whistles in the above?! You betcha! But wait … there’s more!

While exploring this particular IGES, much to our surprise, my mouse and I stumbled across a May 2015 pdf [backup here] entitled “List of the Board members, Auditors, Honorary Advisors and Counselors”. The “surprises” we found were on p. 2, i.e. on the list of “Honorary Advisors”:

Talk about “recycling”, eh?!

Fancy that! Steiner, Strong and Pachauri … recycled as Honorary “tiny fish for Japan”?! If you haven’t heard of Maurice Strong and his “connections” … be sure to take a look at Peter Bobroff’s extensive findings.

Who knows, perhaps this might explain Steiner’s notable absence at the recent gathering of the IPCC’s newly elected honchos of the great and the good kind?!

And speaking of “tiny fish for Japan” … while I was putting this post together, I took a stroll down my musical memory lane. Back in the days – long ago and faraway – when one could actually hear the lyrics in a song. So, I thought I’d share the (still missed and tragically departed as a consequence of a 1989 plane disaster) music of a great Canadian voice, Stan Rogers. Enjoy!

9 thoughts on “Rajendra Pachauri: a recycled tiny fish for Japan?”

Prof Shukla’s shenanigans asking Obama to institute RICO proceedings against organizations, scientists and bloggers who didn’t subscribe to his view of global warming were bad. His extraction of large amounts of research grant money through his IGES and other research institutions manned by his wife and other relatives was just sordid.

He obviously was surprised when his money grubbing tendencies were exposed because he took down his letter from the IGES website and then promptly closed down IGES saying that all of its research programs were complete. They weren’t. He was also found to have transferred $100k to an Indian based charity that he heads up, the $100k was for research in America but he just gave it away to a foreign country basically.

He obviously feels that he is such a brightly shining star in the AGW firmament that he can do as he wishes. Trying to get people he disagrees with locked up for heresy, funding his lifestyle through nepotism and diverting government cash to causes he favours. I think Prof Shukla of the George Mason University is a bit of a shady character which is why he will feel quite at home at the IPCC.

I think Prof Shukla of the George Mason University is a bit of a shady character which is why he will feel quite at home at the IPCC.

Shaking Shukla trees can certainly be quite confusing – particularly as one or another leaf may land at an IPCC table, at one point or another!

Jagadish Shukla of RICO initiative infamy and GMU (and, btw, one who fancies his “contribution” to AR4 as deserving of note via pic of his Pachauri-generated “award” – see: http://www.iges.org/people/shukla_gallery.html#ipcc) is not the same as P.R. Shukla who was recently plucked by the IPCC powers that be to serve as a Co-Chair of Working Group III.

Although, now that you mention it …

Considering the absence of any Shukla pic in the latest IPCC gathering gallery – along with the IPCC’s considerably less than stellar record for accuracy (and fondness for “recycling”!) on so many fronts – it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the less than illustrious “P.R. Shukla (India)” may, at some point, turn out to be a mere “typo” which will – with the due passage of time – be silently “corrected” to read “Jagadish Shukla”.

At the very least one might want to launch an IPCC “Shukla Watch” in the months and years ahead ;-)

Thanks, but your first link provides the same brief and scant details to which I had pointed in my post above. However, it may – or may not – be worth noting that your second link indicates that Shukla claims to have been a::

lead author of several international reports including eight [unspecified] IPCC reports [my bold -hro]

This is somewhat at odds with his:

Lead Author of IPCC Second Assessment Report and Technical Papers 1 and 4.

In your first link, as well as mine noted above!

So, which of Shukla’s claims to IPCC fame should one believe?!

Not to mention that your second link leads to a two-day June 2005 (i.e. a few months after Kyoto came into “force”) conference at which Shukla delivered and/or participated** in a mere 40 minute session entitled: “”Developing Countries and the Post-Kyoto Agreement: The Rationale and Architecture for Aligning “Development and Climate” Interests”.

** A “Discussant” was also listed; so presumably some of those precious 40 minutes were taken up by this person!

But I see that Richard Tol was also a presenter (immediately following Shukla) at this conference. Perhaps we should as him for his “assessment” of Shukla’s performance?!

For whatever reason, brevity and vagueness seem to be this particular Shukla’s “specialties”! Clarity, accuracy and consistency, however, may not be counted among his strengths. Although he claims that “modelling” is one of his talents and/or interests.

Such are the “gold standard” qualities of IPCC personnel, eh?! Assuming, of course, that this Shukla really is the Shukla who has been named as one of the two CLA’s for WGIII of AR6 – as opposed to yet another mere IPCC typo!

Hilary
When you say of the Prof Shukla’s 2010 it is “not particularly frequently viewed”, I see you are making a masterful understatement. In over 7 years it has reached 136 views. Clearly, Prof Shukla is needing some tutorage from climate communications experts Professors Oreskes and Lewandowsky.

Oh, I’m quite sure Oreskes and/or Lewandowsky would gladly take Shukla under their wing! But if they happen to be otherwise occupied, I don’t doubt that Canada’s recent doubling of its IPCC funding commitment will enable the IPCC powers that be to comfortably take Shukla’s tutelage in hand ;-)